The NMH at St. Vincents

markodaly · 09-12-2018 12:59pm

nullzero wrote: »

The Anglican Church didn't exist until the reformation.

Yes, but some denominations call themselves Catholic today, just like some Eastern churches today, just like the Irish church before the Normans.... are you getting it now or is it all too hard for you.

To repeat... again...
The term Catholic today is synonymous with the Roman church but it was not always thus, hence one can call the Irish church since the Christianity came to these shores in the 5th century, Catholic, but Rome did not hold sway over this church until the 11th century.

If you do not get this simple rationale and evolution of both language and institutions then you're better off in the CT forum

Bannasidhe · 09-12-2018 1:06pm

markodaly wrote: »

Yes, but some denominations call themselves Catholic today, just like some Eastern churches today, just like the Irish church before the Normans.... are you getting it now or is it all too hard for you.

To repeat... again...
The term Catholic today is synonymous with the Roman church but it was not always thus, hence one can call the Irish church since the Christianity came to these shores in the 5th century, Catholic, but Rome did not hold sway over this church until the 11th century.

If you do not get this simple rationale and evolution of both language and institutions then you're better off in the CT forum

If you are the expert you are claiming to be you know that the Irish church considered itself subject to Rome long before the Normans came.

So you are either spinning or not as knowledgeable as you make out.

markodaly · 09-12-2018 1:07pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Mark is kind of correct but he is cherry picking.

To be clear this all started by the notion that the history of the church in this island is about 100 years old (as if the church came to be in 1923 alone), when in fact, of course, its been here in one form or another for the past 1500 years.

Posters make wide sweeping allegations about this or that which of course is misleading, that is of course if the point is to inform rather than proselytize.

I would be more than happy to concede the point that the Irish church should cut all ties with Rome and the Vatican.

uptherebels · 09-12-2018 1:11pm

markodaly wrote: »

So you don't know. Which is fine by the way. But to that extent, you then concede the point that the state were always paying teachers and nurses, when in fact they weren't for much of the history of this Island.

Yes, I do. Again, I am not happy with that situation but again a simple solution. Buy the properties that these schools own.

wow! the history of the island! how far back do you go? is the 1830's not enough?
well is suppose when, you said history of this island you could go back millions of years:rolleyes:

markodaly · 09-12-2018 1:16pm

uptherebels wrote: »

wow! the history of the island! how far back do you go? is the 1830's not enough?
well is suppose when, you said history of this island you could go back millions of years:rolleyes:

So the point is to proselytize, not inform. At least we know now. Again, this is AH, not the Athenian Agora.

nullzero · 09-12-2018 1:26pm

markodaly wrote: »

Yes, but some denominations call themselves Catholic today, just like some Eastern churches today, just like the Irish church before the Normans.... are you getting it now or is it all too hard for you.

To repeat... again...
The term Catholic today is synonymous with the Roman church but it was not always thus, hence one can call the Irish church since the Christianity came to these shores in the 5th century, Catholic, but Rome did not hold sway over this church until the 11th century.

If you do not get this simple rationale and evolution of both language and institutions then you're better off in the CT forum

You said the Irish Catholic Church was here long before the roman Catholic Church. That doesn't make any logical sense. The term Catholic can be used any way you want Now, back then it meant the roman Catholic Church.

What this has to do with conspiracy theories I don't know.

aloyisious · 09-12-2018 1:36pm

markodaly wrote: »

You seem easily confused my dear. I did not say that at all, you can, of course, quote me.

To clarify for those hard of reading, there existed an Irish church long before the Roman church on this Island. Both of these churches would have called itself Catholic due to the doctrine, theology and teachings of the time.

One can certainly call this an Irish Catholic church, even if the modern-day term Catholic is near synonymous with the Vatican hence the confusion by some.

Regardless, the original point stands, regardless of nitpicking.

Catholic as in Universal, rather than the RC Vatican version of Christianity [which is an altogether different topic]?

Bringing our national history up to the present age and to this new national maternity hospital debate, I can understand people not being able to see the difference between the term Catholic and the Vatican as that sameness is promoted by the Vatican, and having homegrown agents here willing presently to promote the Vatican line when it comes to deciding what is in civil law here [which both the Vatican and their agents want to be subservient to RC Canon law/s issued from the Vatican].

The notion that an Irish male adult [the editor of the Irish Catholic newspaper] can promote the notion that the Vatican can over-rule Irish Civil law with RC canon [religious] law is plain proof that some people here think the Irish people must continue to obey the Vatican even in matters of a national health plan and hospital funded totally by Irish taxes.

nullzero · 09-12-2018 1:37pm

markodaly wrote: »

So the point is to proselytize, not inform. At least we know now. Again, this is AH, not the Athenian Agora.

You're the one sidestepping your own statements and now you're projecting the notion of proselytising onto others when all that's happening in an analysis of what YOU said.

Gael23 · 09-12-2018 2:28pm

Once they have no voice on the board of management I see no issues with them returning legal ownership

volchitsa · 09-12-2018 2:54pm

Gael23 wrote: »

Once they have no voice on the board of management I see no issues with them returning legal ownership

One reason is because Catholic ideology does not allow them to provide the full range of legal medical services to women, and it appears that they cannot divest themselves of that obligation to ensure that Catholic teaching is respected in properties that they legally own, even if they want to.

IOW they will want (require) some input whether that is via a seat on the board of management or some other mechanism.

Bannasidhe · 09-12-2018 4:41pm

markodaly wrote: »

To be clear this all started by the notion that the history of the church in this island is about 100 years old (as if the church came to be in 1923 alone), when in fact, of course, its been here in one form or another for the past 1500 years.

Posters make wide sweeping allegations about this or that which of course is misleading, that is of course if the point is to inform rather than proselytize.

I would be more than happy to concede the point that the Irish church should cut all ties with Rome and the Vatican.

But for the purposes of this discussion the interconnected, symbiotic, relationship between the new Irish State and the RCC is at the heart of the discussion.

From the beginning the Irish State abdicated responsibility for health care (and education) to the RCC, created a two-tier system of private and public (heavily subsidising one and funding the other), while allowing the ethos of one religion to decide on the agenda and provision of services.

This has no place in a republic.

No religion should be allowed to dominate - or impose it's ideological agenda- on any publicly funded core service.

aloyisious · 10-12-2018 1:46am

Gael23 wrote: »

Once they have no voice on the board of management I see no issues with them returning legal ownership

The snag is that with ownership of the land comes the title of landlord. According to Saturday's Irish Times, one part of the deal between the Dept, Holles St and St Vincents on the setting up of the NMH is that the nuns will be paid a nominal rent of ten Euro a year for the 99 year lease of the site the new NMH is built on.

The ownership of the land can be swept under the carpet by those involved in trying to get the new NMH built but that fact will still be there, even if there is paperwork done in the name of the new SVH group to get construction going. The nuns got a reminder from an Irish bishop about their loyalty to the teachings of the church with reference to the planned NMH on their property and the plan for abortion procedures to be carried out there.

Two other things which have been announced are: A. the RC archbishop of Dublin will be removing himself from the title of chair of Holles St Hospital board of governance and: B. the master of Holles St NMH will be leaving that post by the new year.

gctest50 · 10-12-2018 1:59am

Gael23 wrote: »

Once they have no voice on the board of management I see no issues with them returning legal ownership

Why are they there then ? for decoration ?

markodaly · 10-12-2018 11:39pm

nullzero wrote: »

You said the Irish Catholic Church was here long before the roman Catholic Church. That doesn't make any logical sense. The term Catholic can be used any way you want Now, back then it meant the roman Catholic Church.

I have already gone into quite a lot of detail about this, and so has another poster. If you cannot grasp the concept by now, I suggest you just bow out of the debate.

markodaly · 10-12-2018 11:46pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But for the purposes of this discussion the interconnected, symbiotic, relationship between the new Irish State and the RCC is at the heart of the discussion.

From the beginning the Irish State abdicated responsibility for health care (and education) to the RCC, created a two-tier system of private and public (heavily subsidising one and funding the other), while allowing the ethos of one religion to decide on the agenda and provision of services.

This has no place in a republic.

No religion should be allowed to dominate - or impose it's ideological agenda- on any publicly funded core service.

I do not have much disagreement with this to be honest.

My main bone of contention is the fact that the debate today on this thread is more about scaremongering as if nuns will be patrolling the wards of the new NMH and giving advice on medical treatments. This, of course, is nonsense.

If one wants to have a debate about private or public ownership of this hospital, that's fine. One solution is, of course, is for the state to buy the land from the SOC. A solution no one wants to put forward however because they know it would cost the taxpayer an extra few hundred million.

People believed Rhona o'Mahony during the 8th campaign, but now want to dismiss her point of view. I find that odd.

Getting down to simple bare bones of the situation, its turned political because the sheeple always like a good church bashing now and again, if there are votes in there for them.

anotherfinemess · 11-12-2018 12:02am

Why do nuns need a maternity hospital? Are they allowed to have babies now?

NuMarvel · 11-12-2018 12:39am

anotherfinemess wrote: »

Why do nuns need a maternity hospital? Are they allowed to have babies now?

It was government policy, not "the nuns" that decided the NMH should relocate to St Vincent's. The hospital weren't even initially in favour of the relocation and had to be convinced.

And before anyone says it, there wasn't any realistic alternative. The plan is that each of the three hospital groups in Dublin will have a maternity hospital co-located with a major adult hospital. The only other major adult hospital in their group that the NMH could have relocated to was the Mater, which would have presented greater challenges in getting planning permission. And is also owned by a religious order, so people would have the same objections they have now, assuming planning was granted.

nullzero · 11-12-2018 1:28am

markodaly wrote: »

I have already gone into quite a lot of detail about this, and so has another poster. If you cannot grasp the concept by now, I suggest you just bow out of the debate.

Or I could adopt your tactic of waiting 24 hours or so until everyone has moved on from the thread(I recall you employing the exact same tactic on another thread about a week ago) to come back and steal the moral high ground whilst taking a condescending tone. You've gone into a lot of detail on concepts that aren't related to what you said.
You cherry pick your quotes and you still haven't addressed the question I asked; where is the evidence for this Irish Catholic Church of yours? The one that supposedly existed long before the roman Catholic Church on this island.

"I suggest you bow out of the debate", what a nice suggestion a full day after you did exactly that.

markodaly · 11-12-2018 12:14pm

nullzero wrote: »

Or I could adopt your tactic of waiting 24 hours or so

I am sorry, but I do have a life.

Ush1 · 11-12-2018 12:41pm

markodaly wrote: »

one can call the Irish church since the Christianity came to these shores in the 5th century, Catholic

Sure you can call an apple an orange but it's just symantics isn't it?:)

markodaly · 11-12-2018 12:56pm

Ush1 wrote: »

Sure you can call an apple an orange but it's just symantics isn't it?:)

Is it semantics or symantics?

Pyr0 · 11-12-2018 12:57pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Mark is kind of correct but he is cherry picking.

The "Gaelic" Church considered itself part of the broad European Church ruled from Rome but had some doctrinal differences - the most well known being the date of Easter, which was sorted out at the Synod of Whitby in 664 when the vote went Rome's way and the Gaelic church conceded...

The State paid the bills but abdicated control to the Roman Catholic Church.

Very interesting post, thanks for that!

Hotblack Desiato · 12-12-2018 1:07am

markodaly wrote: »

Oh, this is another one of those cute soundbytes but when you look at the actual evidence, it turns out to be as you say, bullsh!t.

Yes the councils did pay the nuns. Problem was the nuns spent the bare minumum of that money on the women and children in the homes. You also overlook their other sources of money - extorting the families of the women, stealing and selling babies. Yet they stuck women into mass graves and children into disused cesspits without even recording let alone marking the burials.

Funny isn't it that we had laundries paying their workers nothing, charging commercial rates for their services yet, according to the nuns at the inquiry a few years back, made no profit?

Yet somehow the "Mercy" and "Charity" nuns now have private healthcare empires worth billions.

Something sure doesn't add up... could it be that the nuns are lying?? :rolleyes:

I must have missed the time nuns were driving around Ireland and lifting kids of Irish streets and shoving them into vans. Again a cute soundbyte for the perpetually offended to gather around.

There's no need for you to pretend to not know what we're talking about, when it's perfectly obvious to everyone else. They stole children, that's a fact. The women did not consent to the adoption of their children and were in no position to prevent it. Most of these adoptions were illegal under Irish law.

Hotblack Desiato · 12-12-2018 1:07am

jimd2 wrote: »

Did you fully read the article that I linked? i.e the part where she said that there will be no involvement of the sister of charity whatsoever in the running of the hospital?

Yes I did. It's classic RC "mental reservation" i.e. lying. There may be no nuns "involved" but the religious trust established by the nuns certainly will be "involved"

Regarding your comment there about nuns my own experience with nuns would be more positive than what you are saying there.

Good for you. There's still no reason to hand over any hospital built with public money to a private trust, whether one actively run by religious orders, one established by them, or otherwise.

aloyisious · 12-12-2018 1:56pm

An example of a secular maternity hospital hospital would be the original National Maternity Hospital, founded through charitable donations in 1894 and granted a royal charter in 1903. The present Holles St hospital building was built in 1936 with redevelopment funded from the Irish Hospital Sweepstakes. The original board of governance was changed during that decade with the Archbishop of Dublin then appointed as it's chair. It seems to have successfully operated as an maternity hospital for decades without input from a nuns order and is only moving to a new building for the sake of its patients, the St Vincents site being the one chosen as the best one available.

As the aim is to serve pregnant women of all and none belief, involvement in the medical running of the new NMH by a religious order is clearly unnecessary. The nuns religious ethics will conflict with their position as owners and landlord of the site where the NMH would be sited, with all the medically necessary operations that it will have to perform there, which it performs presently at its Holles St premises.

It would be extremely charitable if the order was to donate ownership of the site to the board of Holles St NMH for the new NMH. It might even be possible to get tax relief from such a donation into the bargain, a write-off beneficial for all.

markodaly · 12-12-2018 10:24pm

I have mentioned a few times now, why don't the state buy the land?

There seems to be a vocal minority who want to browbeat them into handing over complete ownership of said land and property to virtue signal.

As has been correctly stated, it was the state who choose the site. The SOC did not ask for this hospital to be built on their land, nor are they asking to be involved in the day to day running of it.

People wanting to have it both ways like little Englander Brexiters.

aloyisious · 13-12-2018 12:26am

markodaly wrote: »

I have mentioned a few times now, why don't the state buy the land?

There seems to be a vocal minority who want to browbeat them into handing over complete ownership of said land and property to virtue signal.

As has been correctly stated, it was the state who choose the site. The SOC did not ask for this hospital to be built on their land, nor are they asking to be involved in the day to day running of it.

People wanting to have it both ways like little Englander Brexiters.

I don't know the legal niceties the order has to follow in the management of the whole of the St Vincents Hospital campus it own's but it's possible it may have been impossible to sell off a specific section of the campus for use by the NMH and still maintain ownership of the rest of the campus if it is in a pre-existing trust at the moment separate to the one proposed for the running of the new NMH.

Edit. I imagine [though I have not seen the plans] that the section of the campus proposed for the new NMH will be surrounded-by the larger part of the campus and not positioned adjacent-to Nutley Lane whereby it could have it's own entrance/exit. It would be good if the NMH had such but I don't see the owner ceding that much to the Govt etc where it comes to property-ownership rights and a lessee's rights.

Bannasidhe · 13-12-2018 11:49am

markodaly wrote: »

I have mentioned a few times now, why don't the state buy the land?

There seems to be a vocal minority who want to browbeat them into handing over complete ownership of said land and property to virtue signal.

As has been correctly stated, it was the state who choose the site. The SOC did not ask for this hospital to be built on their land, nor are they asking to be involved in the day to day running of it.

People wanting to have it both ways like little Englander Brexiters.

I think calling it virtue signalling is to ignore the fact that the Sister's of Charity have failed to pay the full amount they committed to pay towards redressing victims of (their) historical abuse and now about to be "gifted" a sizable asset built by the same State they owe money to...

And yes, it is being "gifted" - building an asset on leased land is to ultimately "gift" that asset to the owner of the land . What happens when the lease runs out? I is my understanding it is a 99 year lease. That is ridiculously short for such a major investment by the State. It is entirely possible that children born in that Maternity Hospital in it's first year of operation will still be alive when that lease ends A lease of one lifetime. Insanity.
What happens in 99 years? Will there be a renegotiation of the terms? Will it be a case of - well, this land is worth considerably more now due to having this large asset on it so we will have to charge more?

Give the SOC owes the State money, and their guilt as regards historical abuse - would it kill them to sell the site of the Mat Hosp to the State for a sum that takes into account their debts and divest themselves of all involvement?

ProfessorPlum · 15-12-2018 12:31am

......not to mention the fact that the state has already essentially paid for both the SVUH site and buildings through the Irish Hospital Sweepstakes and our taxes!

aloyisious · 22-11-2019 4:04pm

The "who owns the hospital" issue is live again apparently. Some [lay] gent in the Vatican is present-day supposedly urging the powers-that-be there to refuse to give the order of nuns permission to hand over the site due to their obligation to the church. I heard mention of the former NMH master on RTE 2 days ago saying something about the ownership but assumed it was about something done and dusted from the past, I was wrong as the Irish Catholic publication reportedly has an article in it about the latest objection being raised within the Vatican to the deal with the nuns. Mention was also apparently made in the article [which I haven't read] about the upcoming retirement of the Archbishop of Dublin which it supposes means if the present deal on the table is not concluded before his retirement, the whole handover deal falls apart. Passing mention was also made to the minister and the new NMH project.

Bannasidhe · 22-11-2019 4:28pm

aloyisious wrote: »

The "who owns the hospital" issue is live again apparently. Some [lay] gent in the Vatican is present-day supposedly urging the powers-that-be there to refuse to give the order of nuns permission to hand over the site due to their obligation to the church. I heard mention of the former NMH master on RTE 2 days ago saying something about the ownership but assumed it was about something done and dusted from the past, I was wrong as the Irish Catholic publication reportedly has an article in it about the latest objection being raised within the Vatican to the deal with the nuns. Mention was also apparently made in the article [which I haven't read] about the upcoming retirement of the Archbishop of Dublin which it supposes means if the present deal on the table is not concluded before his retirement, the whole handover deal falls apart. Passing mention was also made to the minister and the new NMH project.

Taxpayer pays but RCC ethos will be the excuse to try and deny those same taxpayers the right to access a safe, legal, abortion.

Gee... and we were told that would never happen.

The Vatican is reportedly being urged to block the transfer of land at St Vincent's University Hospital in Dublin for the building of a new national maternity hospital over concerns that abortions would be carried out there.

The Irish Catholic Newspaper has reported that the Vatican is under pressure to block the plans.

Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, Irish Catholic editor Michael Kelly said the Catholic Church will not stand over a situation where the Sisters of Charity, who own the St Vincent's site, are involved in a hospital where abortions are taking place.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/1122/1094481-national-maternity-hospital/

RobertKK · 22-11-2019 4:53pm

People need to stand up for what they believe in.

Bannasidhe · 22-11-2019 5:05pm

RobertKK wrote: »

People need to stand up for what they believe in.

I have no problem with that as long as I am not expected to fund them to deny women their legal rights.

Kermit.de.frog · 22-11-2019 5:34pm

I really don't see the problem here tbh.

Just seems like concocted anger for anger's sake?

The land is in the hands of the catholic church. Of course they don't want abortions. That is them standing by their beliefs.

Build it elsewhere if it's an issue.

Hotblack Desiato · 22-11-2019 5:49pm

:rolleyes: Pretty much the whole point of the new NMH is that it's co-located with an adult teaching hospital.

decky1 · 22-11-2019 6:01pm

good ould Ireland, The poor nun's , that's a joke.

Bannasidhe · 22-11-2019 6:06pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I really don't see the problem here tbh.

Just seems like concocted anger for anger's sake?

The land is in the hands of the catholic church. Of course they don't want abortions. That is them standing by their beliefs.

Build it elsewhere if it's an issue.

Then the RCC can pay for it.
They can certainly afford it.

The State should not be using public money to pay for facilities that are controlled by any organisation that will put it's own ethos above the law of the land.
Abortions are legal.

elperello · 22-11-2019 6:58pm

The Catholic church are certainly entitled to their beliefs but it is vital that before any public money is spent that the issue of control is resolved.

Hotblack Desiato · 22-11-2019 7:21pm

RobertKK wrote: »

People need to stand up for what they believe in.

I believe that taxpayer funded services including education and health should have no religious "ethos" imposed upon them.

decky1 · 22-11-2019 10:27pm

worked for nun's for a while gardening etc, when you see first hand how lavish their lifestyle is all the furniture and trappings, then they go out 'foreign' to help the poor for a few months, if their so concerned about the poor why do they not sell all these fine items and give to the poor as should the Vatican, millions of euro's worth of paintings etc , their not worried about poverty--- they really are a force to be reckoned with.

beejee · 22-11-2019 10:41pm

The government is...

Short-sighted.

Incompetent.

Will sell anything, anywhere, anytime, to any for-profit private company anywhere on earth for a fraction of its worth.

Giving them control of assets is akin to giving a 10 year old 50'000 in cash. They'll equally blow it in a weekend, be robbed blind, and then come home crying because they've nothing left, expecting a hand out and forgiveness.

For all that you can say about the Catholic Church, they know how to run things competently. Even bad things

Just to add, so great is their incompetence, I bet that as soon as they announce any kind of idea or plan, there are slick dudes rubbing their hands and laughing. Another legal robbery handed into laps.

NuMarvel · 24-11-2019 3:07pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I really don't see the problem here tbh.

Just seems like concocted anger for anger's sake?

The land is in the hands of the catholic church. Of course they don't want abortions. That is them standing by their beliefs.

Build it elsewhere if it's an issue.

It's not as simple as just building elsewhere. All three maternity hospitals in Dublin are to be relocated to the campuses of adult hospitals, and there are only 6 of those. Out of those, Vincent's is the only one that's in the same operational area as the NMH. The partnerships between all the adult and maternity hospitals have been built up on the basis of those areas, so it won't be as simple as moving the NMH to a different one.

And that's before we assess the suitability of adult hospitals in other areas to be a co-location site for a maternity hospital. For example, Connolly is meant to get the new Rotunda, but it needs significant time investment to be a suitable site.

Hotblack Desiato · 25-11-2019 1:30am

beejee wrote: »

The government is...

Short-sighted.

Incompetent.

Will sell anything, anywhere, anytime, to any for-profit private company anywhere on earth for a fraction of its worth.

Giving them control of assets is akin to giving a 10 year old 50'000 in cash. They'll equally blow it in a weekend, be robbed blind, and then come home crying because they've nothing left, expecting a hand out and forgiveness.

For all that you can say about the Catholic Church, they know how to run things competently. Even bad things

Just to add, so great is their incompetence, I bet that as soon as they announce any kind of idea or plan, there are slick dudes rubbing their hands and laughing. Another legal robbery handed into laps.

This post is completely and utterly idiotic.

ILoveYourVibes · 25-11-2019 3:18am

mrsmags16 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/sisters-of-charity-to-be-given-new-national-maternity-hospital-1.3052079

Is this a joke?!

I am stunned, appalled and disgusted. Women are not going to be safe in that hospital.

The sisters of mercy should be left to rot in the dark.

ILoveYourVibes · 25-11-2019 3:25am

RobertKK wrote: »

People need to stand up for what they believe in.

THEY HAVE!

We voted against the 8th.

Now you cannot tell me abortion is a part of maternity care in some cases. You can't ask me to believe its a procedure those nuns will ever allow carried out in that hospital even if a mother's life is at risk.

Loafing Oaf · 29-11-2019 11:42am

Fears 'Vatican veto' will result in fresh delay for National Maternity Hospital

What happens if the Vatican ultimately says no?

Hotblack Desiato · 29-11-2019 12:15pm

Ideally a CPO.

In reality, probably this

aloyisious · 08-05-2020 12:02pm

Sean O'Rourke is breaking his own rules by breaking news of the Nuns order who own St Vincent's Hospital grounds are gifting property there to the state. Sean has made it plain that there's a lot more to be made known yet of the gift on the upcoming RTE News programmes today, circumstances, and whether its the actual whole or a portion of the grounds, whom the new title-holder Ministerial Dep't will be, and what legal benefits are in the reported gift deal for the order. Another guest on the S,O'R show mentioned that the Vatican was in accord with whatever was put on the table [as it were] from the nuns order.

ILoveYourVibes · 08-05-2020 12:15pm

Ah the age old question how to defeat nuns once they have infested ...well they don't scare me!

Hotblack Desiato · 08-05-2020 12:31pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Sean O'Rourke is breaking his own rules

Eh???

The NMH at St. Vincents

Comments